People v. Timber

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Timber

293 A.D.2d 304, 739 N.Y.S.2d 572, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3579

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 9, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 293 A.D.2d 304 (People v. Timber) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Timber, 293 A.D.2d 304, 739 N.Y.S.2d 572, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3579 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Daniel FitzGerald, J.), rendered June 9, 1999, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 6 to 12 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based upon sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Credibility issues, including inconsistencies in testimony, were properly considered by the jury and there is no basis upon which to disturb its determinations.

We perceive no basis for a reduction in sentence. Concur— Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Rosenberger and Friedman, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Daniel FitzGerald, J.), rendered June 9, 1999, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 6 to 12 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based upon sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Credibility issues, including inconsistencies in testimony, were properly considered by the jury and there is no basis upon which to disturb its determinations.

We perceive no basis for a reduction in sentence. Concur— Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Rosenberger and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

293 A.D.2d 304, 739 N.Y.S.2d 572, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3579, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-timber-nyappdiv-2002.